For that matter, I highly dislike how this book says "adults running the tournaments knew the correct answers to all debate topics, and these were always the conclusions the debaters themselves were expected to reach..." This demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of how NCFCA works. They intentionally choose nonpartisan debate topics that invoke very little conservative bias, and the administration does not expect the students to reach any conclusion other than their own.

It would be great if this is the case now, but I find that humorous based on my experience from 2004-2009. There was a strong conservative bias at play in many debate rounds (free markets good/policies requiring govt intervention bad, foreign aid bad, not to mention immigration year). IE rounds were even more skewed. All I had to do with an extemp topic about North Korea or Iran was present a simplified neo-con perspective on the situation without much analysis and generally that resulted in high rankings. And of course apologetics is explicitly bound by orthodoxy.

Yeah, I'll admit that there were some rounds that I won simply because I appealed to a judge's bias better than my opponent did. There were exceptions, but parent judges often brought their conservative bias with them to the round.

It would be great if this is the case now, but I find that humorous based on my experience from 2004-2009. There was a strong conservative bias at play in many debate rounds (free markets good/policies requiring govt intervention bad, foreign aid bad, not to mention immigration year). IE rounds were even more skewed. All I had to do with an extemp topic about North Korea or Iran was present a simplified neo-con perspective on the situation without much analysis and generally that resulted in high rankings. And of course apologetics is explicitly bound by orthodoxy.

Ginger Josh wrote:

Yeah, I'll admit that there were some rounds that I won simply because I appealed to a judge's bias better than my opponent did. There were exceptions, but parent judges often brought their conservative bias with them to the round.

Oh, there's definitely conservative bias, don't get me wrong. There's some sort of political bias, liberal or conservative, in pretty much every debate league I've ever heard of. My point is that the article acts like NCFCA's goal is to brainwash kids into being more conservative, or at least to make kids reach predetermined conclusions. I'm saying NCFCA makes a special effort not to do that in the resolutions they choose.

On a side note, I'd mention that while there is conservative judging bias, it's not very extreme and it doesn't come into play in the vast majority of TP cases. Most cases have nothing in them that would invoke bias. Furthermore, I've won plenty of rounds against FTA cases without much trouble, and I basically argued that free markets were bad. I also defeated a counter-plan once by arguing that it would hurt people by cutting funding to the Affordable Care Act (and both parent judges voted for me, I might add). And I did fairly well with a case to remove TNWs from Turkey, which is advocated almost exclusively by liberals. That same year, lots of my friends ran cases to expand foreign aid and did fantastic, while most cases to cut foreign aid were disastrous. So maybe the league has changed, but I don't notice that much bias.

That said, I have noticed some cases that unfortunately incite bias (Abolish Hate Crimes laws and MDT with Israel come readily to mind).

As for extemp, I never noticed any political bias in it, but I wasn't ever that into it, so I can't really say. Keep in mind, however, that neo-con foreign policy (and especially free trade) are pretty much mainstream nowadays, so it's only natural that you'd argue for it more often than not.

Hey guys, did you catch that episode of Breaking Bad last night? Wow, the way he mowed down all those neo-nazis was mindblowing! Gee, I feel like we're connected so much on an intrinsic level! And gosh, that South Park episode about murder porn? Man, I totally thought the sex scenes and violence were great! You think so too? Wow! Shared experience!!!

Sarcasm? Maybe. But this is what you are saying, brought down to the lowest common denominator.

Ah the irony that I wrote that years ago and now both of those are shows I watch and enjoy, and while South Park is an offensive and acquired taste, I would wholeheartedly recommend Breaking Bad to anyone over 16.

Hey guys, did you catch that episode of Breaking Bad last night? Wow, the way he mowed down all those neo-nazis was mindblowing! Gee, I feel like we're connected so much on an intrinsic level! And gosh, that South Park episode about murder porn? Man, I totally thought the sex scenes and violence were great! You think so too? Wow! Shared experience!!!

Sarcasm? Maybe. But this is what you are saying, brought down to the lowest common denominator.

Ah the irony that I wrote that years ago and now both of those are shows I watch and enjoy, and while South Park is an offensive and acquired taste, I would wholeheartedly recommend Breaking Bad to anyone over 16.

I keep forgetting that you're my old mate, Shayne.

_________________-JoshuaThe dumb Boatswain's Mate who once did debateProud Coastie, Puddle Pirate, and Shallow Water Sailor

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum